Dead State - Update #7, Video Interview

Over the weekend, you’ve really exploded support on Dead State, and we’re nearly at our first stretch goal – thank you! As you may know, stretch goals not only allow us to expand our team and add additional team members, but they are important to us in other ways, such as allowing a buffer for Kickstarter costs (5% to KS, 3-5% to Amazon), offsetting reward costs, and increasing padding in case backers’ payment info can’t be processed (happens more often than you think). We’ve made rapid progress in the last three days – let’s make the last ten days the best on the project!
Today, we’ve got a video message from our Lead Artist Oscar Velzi. Oscar has been on the project since the early stages of the game. He got his start in the modding scene, and has since worked on The Age of Decadence, another indie RPG. As often is the case on indie projects, Oscar works on multiple aspects of the game besides art and is a core member of the team. Here’s Oscar with a message for you and a first look at our work-in-progress hospital level.

They just met their first stretch goal, weapon pack is in. Next is additional areas at $210k. Seems securing funding has finally convinced major news sites to cover this, there have been mentions on the Escapist and Eurogamer, e.g. And pledges are up quite a bit, so hopefully a few more stretch goals can be reached.

It has been reported on this site from the beginning, even though not thoroughly followed.

As suspected, they are shooting at much more than the 150 000 dollars target.

Not a single mock stretch goal in used to justify soaking excess of funding. I would even guess that they retained a few other features, knowing they could not hope to fund them.

Quite sadly, the game is going to be released on a little more than the minimal vision perspective.

Another point, I wonder if they intend to break the video game relation between effort and reward. The city stretch goal indicates they somehow want to keep the proportionality between effort and reward, high risk, high reward.

Yet a survival game could benefit from breaking the relation. Low risk assessed missions should sometimes reward big and high risk missions should sometimes reward small.

But this could be poorly accepted by players as the direct proportionality between effort and reward is a key element of video games success.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
It has been reported on this site from the beginning, even though not thoroughly followed.

Not a single mock stretch goal in used to justify soaking excess of funding. I would even guess that they retained a few other features, knowing they could not hope to fund them.

.

what the hell are you talking about. it was on the home page originally and then it now resides on the update page where it spells out exactly what those goals are for and basically for every $30 extra they are going to higher another staffer. to me that doesn't seem unreasonable for a game with 1 1/2 years left to develop.http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/…ival-rpg/posts

— —-when we figure out how to build guillotines for corporations the new revolution will have begun—-

Originally Posted by Capt. Huggy Face
This is just a small indie outfit with a game still in progress, Chien. Can't you go pick on Bioware or something? I might even help you with that.

I did not pick on developpers. Simply wished they collect enough funds to deliver the optimal vision of theirs.

And the second point, nothing against them. I doubt they lack the proficiency to break the relation between effort and reward. The reception by players who hold to this kind of setting is the roadblock here.

Originally Posted by curious
Not a single mock stretch goal in used to justify soaking excess of funding. I would even guess that they retained a few other features, knowing they could not hope to fund them.